I built OnSkillDemand to replace gut-feel hiring with structured evidence
by YURII KAPLUNOVTechnical interviews often end with scattered notes, inconsistent questions, and opinions that are difficult to compare.
We built OnSkillDemand to organize hiring around each vacancy—from requirements and candidates to interview rounds, AI-assisted questions, notes, evidence, scores, and reports.
AI helps prepare and organize the work. Recruiters and interviewers make every evaluation and final decision.
It’s available on iOS and Android, and we’re looking for honest feedback from recruiters, hiring managers, and technical interviewers.
What makes interviews inconsistent in your team today? Which integrations would make OnSkillDemand useful in your workflow?
iPhone: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/onskilldemand/id6802425299
Android: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.ideaintech.onskilldemand
-
1
The evidence-based positioning makes sense, but the real test seems to be whether it changes decisions rather than just organizing notes better. Have any hiring teams used OnSkillDemand across multiple candidates and found that the structured evidence changed or clarified a hiring decision?
-
1
Great question, Aryan! That is exactly the test we care about.
We’re currently using OnSkillDemand within our own team and while providing structured interview services to other teams. The clearest early benefit has been decision clarity: interviewers connect scores to specific evidence, disagreements become visible, and candidates can be compared against the same role requirements instead of relying on memory or gut feeling.
I don’t want to overstate the results yet. Our full platform is in the final stage of development, and we’re currently testing its multilayer, multi-agent system for organizing vacancy requirements, interview evidence, scoring, and reports. We plan to invite early testing teams soon.
For now, simpler mobile versions are available in Google Play and AppStore.
The apps reduce repetitive preparation work: users can create a vacancy from a short description, generate and edit interview questions and answer guidance for each round, capture evidence, and produce a structured report after the interview.
If you work with hiring teams, I’d be genuinely interested to hear which types of evidence they consider most valuable—and what would convince them that a system like this improves the final decision, rather than simply organizing notes better. We’d also greatly appreciate your honest feedback if you try either application)-
1
The decision-clarity signal is the part I’d be most interested in digging into, especially across multiple interviewers. If you’re open to it, what’s the best email to reach you on?
-
-